Cyber-Physical Co-Design Reliability Framework for ASIL-D Automotive Sensor ECUs with Integrated Hardware–Software Fault Tolerance and Security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extended complexity of the electronics control units (ECUs) of autonomous and electric cars makes it necessary to implement fault-tolerant designs that comply with the ISO26262ASIL-D. The paper will discuss how hardware-software co-design is used in guaranteeing the safety and reliability of automotive sensor ECUs. The systematic review of 21 articles published between 2021 and 2025 lists integrated strategies related to redundancy, virtualisation, artificial intelligence, and cybersecurity to attain the fail-operational resilience. In the research, the co-designed systems have been shown to have a 90 per cent diagnostic coverage, less than 5 ms recovery latency, and 95 per cent fault detection performance, which is much better than the traditional modular design. Hardware redundancy ensures physical resilience, and adaptive software enables the tasks and proactive fault recovery to be transmitted without difficulties. Moreover, there are cybersecurity features, including voltage-based ECU fingerprinting and root-of-trust verification, to improve the reliability of communications. This paper suggests the Co-Design Reliability Enhancement Framework (CREF) that has the capability of guaranteeing compliance with ASIL-D through the incorporation of redundancy, artificial intelligence, and fault prediction, as well as pipeline testing. The framework illustrates that cybersecurity and functional safety will need to go together, and the ideas of co-design underlie the design of the next-generation, software-defined, fault-tolerant vehicles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".